if I had an option to rent any movie for a price that isnt stupidly high then sure
I dont want to pay for a streaming service, I just want to watch specific shit I like
Honestly this. When Netflix had basically everything you would want to see most people stopped pirating and we're satisfied to pay an honest price for the content. Now that it's all ridiculously overpriced again piracy is the only thing that makes sense.
>Jehovas Witness (TM) says that trinity isn’t real
Holy mother of heresy
2 years ago
Anonymous
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. > >"I and the Father are one." > >"Before Abraham was, I AM."
When Jesus makes statements that confess God's superiority to Him, He is speaking from His human nature. When He makes statements such as the above, He is speaking from His divine nature.
The Hypostatic union is the union of the divine and human nature in Christ's personhood. Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man. Thus everything that can be said of God can be said of the person of Jesus Christ. This is a wonderful mystery that angels cannot fathom. Don't deny it. Ask God to let you see it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
I am not a Greek expert, so let's see what Greek experts says.
While many Bible translators render the verse to say that the word is God, others see the need to render it differently. In the original-language text, the two occurrences of “God” (Greek, the·osʹ) at John 1:1 are grammatically different.
In the first occurrence, the word “God” is preceded by the Greek definite article, while the article does not appear before the second occurrence. Many scholars note that the absence of the definite article before the second the·osʹ is significant.
For example, The Translator’s New Testament says regarding this absence of the article: “In effect it gives an adjectival quality to the second use of Theos (God) so that the phrase means ‘The Word was divine.’” (The Translator’s New Testament, page 451.)
Other scholars and Bible translations point to this same distinction.
Scholar Jason David BeDuhn states that the absence of the definite article makes the two occurrences of “God” “as different as ‘a god’ is from ‘God’ in English.” He adds: “In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or divine being.”—Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament, pages 115, 122, and 123.
by googling I find an expert who disagrees, who also supplies other verses which seem to testify to Christ's divinity:
John 14:7, 1 John 5:20, John 5:17-18
2 years ago
Anonymous
>by googling I find an expert who disagrees
Bible scholar A. T. Robertson recognizes that if both subject and predicate have articles,
“both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable.”
Robertson considers as an example Matthew 13:38, which reads:
“The field [Greek, ho a·grosʹ] is the world [Greek, ho koʹsmos].”
The grammar enables us to understand that the world is also the field.
In both of these verses, the subjects have definite articles but the predicates, “Spirit” and “love,” do not. So the subjects and predicates are not interchangeable.
These verses cannot mean that “Spirit is God” or “love is God.”
>John 14:7
Because Jesus perfectly reflected the personality of his Father, seeing Jesus was like seeing God himself. (Mt 11:27) The disciples had “seen the Father” by perceiving God’s personality, will, and purpose through what Jesus said and did.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>1 John 5:20
It is obvious that grammatically the word “this” (outos) could be referring to either the Father or Jesus in this particular scripture (see the footnote for 1 John 5:20 in the very trinitarian NIV Study Bible and the comments on 1 Jn 5:20 by the staunchly trinitarian scholar A. T. Robertson in his Word Pictures, Vol. VI, p. 245.).
But the fact that the true God (or “the true One”) has just been identified as the Father of Jesus (1 Jn 5:20, TEV and GNB) makes it highly probable that “this is the true God” refers to the Father, not Jesus.
The noted trinitarian NT scholar Murray J. Harris sums up his 13-page analysis of this scripture as follows:
“Although it is certainly possible that outos refers back to Jesus Christ, several converging lines of evidence point to ‘the true one,’ God the Father, as the probable antecedent. This position, outos = God [Father], is held by many commentators, authors of general studies, and significantly, by those grammarians who express an opinion on the matter.” - p. 253, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992.
Notice how this trinitarian scholar actually admits that the probability is that the Father (not Jesus) is being called the true God here. He even tells us (and cites examples in his footnotes) that New Testament grammarians and commentators (most of them trinitarian, of course) agree !!!
So the immediate context makes it probable that the true God is the Father in this scripture also. If we include the context of all the uses of the ‘true God’ in the NT, it is certain that He is the Father (whose personal name is Jehovah - Jer. 10:10, ASV; Ps. 83:18, KJV; Ex. 3:15, NEB). A quick glance at 1 Thess. 1:9 and 10, for example makes it very clear that “the true God” is the Father.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Christ was not referring to oneness in love, otherwise the israelites would not have immediately tried to stone Him (both times after He confessed His divinity!).
>John 5:17-18
Jesus’ opposers are the ones who accused him of making himself equal to God. (John 5:18; 10:30-33)
However, Jesus NEVER claimed to be on the same level as Almighty God. He said: “The Father is greater than I am.”—John 14:28.
Frick off heretic, go preach your gnostic bullshit somewhere else.
the trinity is one God in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Each person is fully God, but each person is not the other person. Jesus Christ is unique in the persons of the trinity as He is both fully God (the Son) and fully man. He has a full human nature and full divine nature.
“My Father is greater than I [Jesus].”—John 14:28.
“I [Jesus] ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God.”—John 20:17.
“To us there is but one God, the Father.”—1 Corinthians 8:6.
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”—1 Peter 1:3.
“These things saith the Amen [Jesus], . . . the beginning of the creation of God.”—Revelation 3:14.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Can I still go to heaven if I frick trannies and skinning mice?
2 years ago
Anonymous
The most obvious example is Thomas meeting risen Christ and calling Him Ho Theos (aha God with the article as in the most High Father, Yahweh).
Before that John calls Jesus merely theos which is generic for a god or a divine being.
John being a theological document, closest to gnosticism in form and style (not the substance, there's only a incipient literary device duality but not an ontological one) and full of symbolism have this weight more than anything, really.
>Thomas answered and said to him, “My LORD and my GOD."
2 years ago
Anonymous
>"I and the Father are one."
That this did not mean that Jesus claimed to be the Father or to be God is evident from his reply !
The oneness to which Jesus referred must be understood in harmony with the context of his statement.
He was speaking of his works and his care of the “sheep” who would follow him. His works, as well as his words, demonstrated that there was unity, not disunity and disharmony, between him and his Father, a point his reply went on to emphasize. (John 10:25, 26, 37, 38; John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 8:16-18.)
As regards his “sheep,” he and his Father were likewise at unity in their protecting such sheeplike ones and leading them to everlasting life. (John 10:27-29; Ezekiel 34:23, 24.)
Jesus’ prayer on behalf of the unity of all his disciples, including future ones, shows that the oneness, or union, between Jesus and his Father was not as to identity of person but as to PURPOSE and ACTION !
In this way Jesus’ disciples could “ALL BE ONE,” just as he and his Father ARE ONE.—John 17:20-23.
>>"Before Abraham was, I AM."
This was not a reference to God's proclamation in Genesis, Jesus was here referring to an existence from before Abraham and continuing down till he spoke
2 years ago
Anonymous
Christ was not referring to oneness in love, otherwise the israelites would not have immediately tried to stone Him (both times after He confessed His divinity!).
Turn back to the one true Catholic Church before it’s too late. Repent.
2 years ago
Anonymous
lol
2 years ago
Anonymous
It makes no sense to act as if you are the restorers of Israel's ancient faith when Israel itself obtained its land through aggressive warfare (albeit which was sanctioned by God) and sanctioned execution by fire in its penal code.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The nations whom Israel defeated were thoroughly corrupted by violence and depraved practices—including bestiality, incest, and child sacrifice.
After giving them centuries to change their ways, God said: “It is by all these things that the nations that I am driving out from before you have made themselves unclean.”—Leviticus 18:21-25; Jeremiah 7:31.
Christians are NOT authorized to fight against their enemies.
Instead of sending his followers to war, Jesus told them: “Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you, so that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens.” (Matthew 5:44, 45)
If God wants his worshippers in all nations to love their enemies and to remain separate from the world, how could he support either side of a violent conflict today ???
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Israel itself obtained its land through aggressive warfare (albeit which was sanctioned by God)
I had relatives in the Palestine campaign of 1917-18, I don't think any of them thought they were sanctioned by God.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I mean ancient Israel, not the modern state
The nations whom Israel defeated were thoroughly corrupted by violence and depraved practices—including bestiality, incest, and child sacrifice.
After giving them centuries to change their ways, God said: “It is by all these things that the nations that I am driving out from before you have made themselves unclean.”—Leviticus 18:21-25; Jeremiah 7:31.
Christians are NOT authorized to fight against their enemies.
Instead of sending his followers to war, Jesus told them: “Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you, so that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens.” (Matthew 5:44, 45)
If God wants his worshippers in all nations to love their enemies and to remain separate from the world, how could he support either side of a violent conflict today ???
Ancient Christians have already grappled with such issues. See Augustine's just war theory. The same ethical intuition which allows us to act to defend the innocent allows states to act to maintain the peace against grievous injustice. I'm just arguing that execution by fire isn't entirely contrary to the Spirit of the Gospel, because one and the same Spirit inspired the Old Testament.
Leviticus 21:9 applies to Israelites, not canaanites. The modern Catholic Church teaches that modern conditions are such that states should no longer have the right to execute people. But such executions are not intrinsically evil.
2 years ago
Anonymous
why do you like cathars so much?
2 years ago
Anonymous
> Lies about being founded by Jesus based on a pun that doesn't even make sense. > Was actually founded in 1475 after getting kicked out of the Orthodox church for telling people they had to worship the Pope as being same or similar to God.
ISHYGDDT
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's such a cute art style... I will say a prayer for her conversion
Proto-Indo-European religion didn’t derive from Near Eastern paganism and Yahwism/Judaism is a direct descendant of Egyptian religion, which came out of Near Eastern Paganism.
>Jehovas Witness (TM) says that trinity isn’t real
Holy mother of heresy
“Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.”—Deuteronomy 6:4.
“You, whose name is Jehovah, you ALONE are the Most High over all the earth.”—Psalm 83:18.
“God is only one.”—Galatians 3:20.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Typical Pr*t propaganda. We aren’t taught that the pope is infallible. He’s only human
2 years ago
Anonymous
Magisterium dude.
2 years ago
Anonymous
catholics literally believe it is impossible for the pope to make error on doctrine
2 years ago
Anonymous
That's not quite true. Catholics believe in Mathew 16, where Christ instructs St Peter to found the Church in His name.
>17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[b] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[d] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[e] loosed in heaven.” 20 Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.
That authority given to St Peter directly by Christ himself has been handed down through successive Popes is the basis of what's called Magisterium which is the authority of the Pope and the Pope alone to speak for God.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>St Peter directly by Christ himself has been handed down through successive Popes
it clearly hasn't. the church of Vatican II is the same church that Christ founded? give me a break
2 years ago
Anonymous
So how come the Catholics we're kicked out of the Orthodox church? It's not like Peter founded the Catholic church and then passed his Pharisee hat down to a new person every so often until you get the current Pope. You guys didn't even exist until almost 2000 years after the crucifixion
2 years ago
Anonymous
Christ founded the Catholic Church and gave the keys to Peter, and the current Pope is the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
The Orthodox have valid bishops, saints, theology, and holiness, but they are in a state of schism.
2 years ago
Anonymous
we should we see how did Peter himself understand Jesus’ words
Growing up an Israelite, Peter would have been familiar with various Hebrew prophecies speaking of a “stone” or a “cornerstone.” (Isaiah 8:13, 14; 28:16; Zechariah 3:9)
When he quoted one of them in a letter to his fellow believers, Peter explained that the prophesied “cornerstone” was the Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah. Peter used the Greek term pe’tra (the same word found in Jesus’ statement at Matthew 16:18) for CHRIST ALONE.—1 Peter 2:4-8.
The most obvious example is Thomas meeting risen Christ and calling Him Ho Theos (aha God with the article as in the most High Father, Yahweh).
Before that John calls Jesus merely theos which is generic for a god or a divine being.
John being a theological document, closest to gnosticism in form and style (not the substance, there's only a incipient literary device duality but not an ontological one) and full of symbolism have this weight more than anything, really.
>Thomas answered and said to him, “My LORD and my GOD."
Thomas obviously addressed Jesus as “my God” in the sense of Jesus’ being “a god” though not the Almighty God, not “the only true God,” to whom Thomas had often heard Jesus pray. (John 17:1-3)
Or he may have addressed Jesus as “my God” in a way similar to expressions made by his forefathers, recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures, with which Thomas was familiar
On various occasions when individuals were visited or addressed by an angelic messenger of Jehovah, the individuals, or at times the Bible writer setting out the account, responded to or spoke of that angelic messenger as though he were Jehovah God. (Compare Genesis 16:7-11, 13; 18:1-5, 22-33; 32:24-30; Judges 6:11-15; 13:20-22.)
This was because the angelic messenger was acting for Jehovah as his REPRESENTATIVE, speaking in his name, perhaps using the first person singular pronoun, and even saying, “I am the true God.” (Ge 31:11-13; Jg 2:1-5)
Thomas may therefore have spoken to Jesus as “my God” in this sense, acknowledging or confessing Jesus as the representative and spokesman of the true God.
Whatever the case, it is certain that Thomas’ words do not contradict the clear statement he himself had heard Jesus make, namely, “The Father is greater than I am.”—John 14:28
didn't Eastern Orthodox and Catholics schism? Pretty sure the Catholics were the OG, maybe or maybe not theologically, but geographically Rome was the capital of Christianity before the schism.
labor is the source of all value. by growing the tree, you are expending labor to produce value independent of the original apples. there's no labor involved in piracy, its simply theft.
Funfact, the law considers it theft if you grow apples that are patented/trademarked by Monsanto, and it's how they bankrupt small farmers. They """accidentally""" have some of their genetically modified seeds fly into a competing farm, then they sue the poor saps for all they're worth.
As someone who pirates everything, the 'it's not stealing it's replicating' arguments are disingenuous. Just admit you want movies, music, etc, without paying for it. Who's going to stop you?
Yes, but Ive also made sure to buy everything I actually enjoyed. If the vidya or movie is good, I will support it. Except tv shows. TV shows shouldnt cost several hundred dollars for a box set frick outta here.
I pirate because I don't give a frick if the entire industry goes under and part of me actually hopes it does. If I can enjoy the rare movie or TV show here and there while actively contributing to the collapse of the industry so much the better.
God the Father (whose name is Jehovah) is the only true God.
Jesus Christ is his firstborn son, is inferior to God, and was created by God.
The Holy Spirit is not a person; it is God's active force.
God is a single being
Jehovah is alone, and above all other beings
Jehovah created everything that exists
Jehovah has a son called Jesus Christ
Jesus is not God
Jesus is not equal to God
Jesus was God's first creation
Jehovah then created everything else through Jesus Christ
I mean ancient Israel, not the modern state
[...]
Ancient Christians have already grappled with such issues. See Augustine's just war theory. The same ethical intuition which allows us to act to defend the innocent allows states to act to maintain the peace against grievous injustice. I'm just arguing that execution by fire isn't entirely contrary to the Spirit of the Gospel, because one and the same Spirit inspired the Old Testament.
Leviticus 21:9 applies to Israelites, not canaanites. The modern Catholic Church teaches that modern conditions are such that states should no longer have the right to execute people. But such executions are not intrinsically evil.
God is one in being, the persons of the trinity are not distinct beings but relations within God.
The analogy I have heard is that the road from Athens to Thebes is the same as the road from Thebes to Athens, yet different things may be predicated (truthfully ascribed to) each road. That is, one road is uphill, and one road is downhill, although they are both the same road. This is how the Trinity works.
For one thing, the Bible does not mention the word “Trinity.” For another, Jesus never claimed to be equal to God. Instead, Jesus worshipped God. (Luke 22:41-44)
You're not supposed to talk about the Holy spirit. Hell you're not even supposed to acknowledge it.
Really only catholics do but they're the synagogue of satan and going to he'll anyway.
Foul pedophiles who worship the prostitute of Babylon!!
He is both part of God and his son. The Holy Trinity, that which is God, is composed of Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. They are different, but they are all part of God.
If you want to wrap your head around it, imagine a man with three heads, each head being independant, but still part of that person.
Ignore the homosexual denouncing the Holy Trinity, it's such a heretical view that neither Orthodox nor Catolics dare entertain. It's more in line with the thinking of 'sorcerers', those searching for magic à la Aleister Crowley.
“The Christian Bible, including the New Testament, has no trinitarian statements or speculations concerning a trinitary deity.”—Encyclopædia Britannica.
“The doctrine of the trinity . . . is not a product of the earliest Christian period, and we do not find it carefully expressed before the end of the second century.”—Library of Early Christianity—Gods and the One God.
“In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the [Catholic] Church had to develop her own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin.”—Catechism of the Catholic Church.
>thinking about grandmother who died a long time ago >pick up her favorite book to help remind you of her/feel more connected to her >NOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T WORSHIP A BOOK, THAT'S HERESY!!!! IDOLITARY!!!!!! >LOVING BLACK PEOPLE IS THE ONLY TRUE WAY TO HEAVEN
Jesus himself directed attention and worship only to JEHOVAH GOD !!
For example, when prodded to do an act of worship to the Devil, Jesus said:
“It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matthew 4:10)
Later Jesus instructed his disciples:
“Do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One.”—Matthew 23:9.
To a Samaritan woman, Jesus described the type of worship that individuals must give to God.
Their worship must be based on spirit and truth. Indeed “the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him.” (John 4:23, 24)
Yes, reverent adoration should be expressed ONLY to GOD.
To render worship to anyone or anything else would be a form of IDOLATRY, which is condemned in both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures.—Exodus 20:4, 5; Galatians 5:19, 20
>Israel's king, Jesus
Jesus was not the king of Israel, he said he was the King of Heaven, which he said does not exist in this world. this is israeli propaganda for neocons who support israel
the trinity is one God in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Each person is fully God, but each person is not the other person. Jesus Christ is unique in the persons of the trinity as He is both fully God (the Son) and fully man. He has a full human nature and full divine nature.
They don't understand that there are a lot of movies people would just never watch it they couldn't watch it for free. It's not even just a price issue (though that's a big part of it.) sorry me movies just don't seem worth the risk.
The third person of the Holy Trinity is the Holy Spirit.
Christ Himself testifies that He is a person:
>when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
i still dont understand who (what?) exactly is the holy spirit
i mean, the father-son part is quite straightforward, but how is the holy spirit different than the father, and if it's just "God's active force" then is it not a person but just God's power? what makes him deserve to be part of the trinity and not just be included with the father?
Each has its own hypostasis that differ in their eternal mode of being but they share the same Divinity fully.
As Omniscience, omnipresence belongs to the Father as part of his substance so those belong to the Spirit and you can say He's everywhere and all that.
Did you get permabanned from Cinemaphile and Cinemaphile for you to spam Cinemaphile and Cinemaphile now you Black person
I wish he used a tripcode. I admit I would filter it but it's obvious that he schizo posts regardless.
The trinity is ultimately so far above us that it is impossible to fully comprehend. But that said, we can have some knowledge of it.
St. Augustine used a metaphor of the human soul to attempt to describe the trinity. In this metaphor, the self is the Father, the self-image is Christ, and the Holy Spirit is the natural love which the self has for itself (or at least its own conception of itself).
To a modern mind, this may seem rather narcissistic. But Augustine's analogy, however brilliant is of course ultimately imperfect, because these things in our own soul are not distinct persons.
The Spirit is not an impersonal power, although He is sometimes described or conceptualized that way. The typical imagery in the Bible is less personal—a breath, a dove, a living fire.
I have heard people say that the love between the Father and the Son is so strong, that the love itself is a person, the Holy Spirit.
For one thing, the Bible does not mention the word “Trinity.” For another, Jesus never claimed to be equal to God. Instead, Jesus worshipped God. (Luke 22:41-44)
[...]
>John 5:17-18
Jesus’ opposers are the ones who accused him of making himself equal to God. (John 5:18; 10:30-33)
However, Jesus NEVER claimed to be on the same level as Almighty God. He said: “The Father is greater than I am.”—John 14:28.
[...]
[...]
“My Father is greater than I [Jesus].”—John 14:28.
“I [Jesus] ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God.”—John 20:17.
“To us there is but one God, the Father.”—1 Corinthians 8:6.
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”—1 Peter 1:3.
“These things saith the Amen [Jesus], . . . the beginning of the creation of God.”—Revelation 3:14.
but you don't buy the movie
The person who uploads it on the internet bought it in the first place
this. if he chooses to give it away thats his business
Sound logic
Does the supermarket still own the food I bought? Do they get to tell me how to I should cook my meals?
The supermarket owns it until you buy it. In this case you didn't buy it.
It's more like if someone else bought an apple and gave away the seeds.
yeah but all the stories are just remixed version of old stories that they don't own anyway.
true
You are buying the seeds and thus own the apples that are grown
if I had an option to rent any movie for a price that isnt stupidly high then sure
I dont want to pay for a streaming service, I just want to watch specific shit I like
Honestly this. When Netflix had basically everything you would want to see most people stopped pirating and we're satisfied to pay an honest price for the content. Now that it's all ridiculously overpriced again piracy is the only thing that makes sense.
>artists don't deserve money but codemonkies who sit on their ass all day consuming cuckold pornography deserve a raise!!
I'm so glad all of you homosexuals are going to be dead soon.
>hurr cwist is coming back
No he's not.
Yes he is
i think your list forgot 2 people
No
What did Hitler do?
he did the stanky leg
He didnt pay his taxes
cut off his arms
>for no reason
granted you Jehovah morons are better than mainline pr*t*st*nts butt you are still morons
You hate us because we are right
>Jehovah's witness
>doesn't even acknowledge Jehovah
Wew lad to the lake of fire you go.
What ?
she has a rather charming art style. too bad she's an arian
The trinity has been debunked
https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/g201308/trinity/
>Jehovas Witness (TM) says that trinity isn’t real
Holy mother of heresy
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
>
>"I and the Father are one."
>
>"Before Abraham was, I AM."
When Jesus makes statements that confess God's superiority to Him, He is speaking from His human nature. When He makes statements such as the above, He is speaking from His divine nature.
The Hypostatic union is the union of the divine and human nature in Christ's personhood. Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man. Thus everything that can be said of God can be said of the person of Jesus Christ. This is a wonderful mystery that angels cannot fathom. Don't deny it. Ask God to let you see it.
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
I am not a Greek expert, so let's see what Greek experts says.
While many Bible translators render the verse to say that the word is God, others see the need to render it differently. In the original-language text, the two occurrences of “God” (Greek, the·osʹ) at John 1:1 are grammatically different.
In the first occurrence, the word “God” is preceded by the Greek definite article, while the article does not appear before the second occurrence. Many scholars note that the absence of the definite article before the second the·osʹ is significant.
For example, The Translator’s New Testament says regarding this absence of the article: “In effect it gives an adjectival quality to the second use of Theos (God) so that the phrase means ‘The Word was divine.’” (The Translator’s New Testament, page 451.)
Other scholars and Bible translations point to this same distinction.
Scholar Jason David BeDuhn states that the absence of the definite article makes the two occurrences of “God” “as different as ‘a god’ is from ‘God’ in English.” He adds: “In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or divine being.”—Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament, pages 115, 122, and 123.
https://www.ntgreek.org/answers/answer-frame-john1_1.htm
by googling I find an expert who disagrees, who also supplies other verses which seem to testify to Christ's divinity:
John 14:7, 1 John 5:20, John 5:17-18
>by googling I find an expert who disagrees
Bible scholar A. T. Robertson recognizes that if both subject and predicate have articles,
“both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable.”
Robertson considers as an example Matthew 13:38, which reads:
“The field [Greek, ho a·grosʹ] is the world [Greek, ho koʹsmos].”
The grammar enables us to understand that the world is also the field.
In both of these verses, the subjects have definite articles but the predicates, “Spirit” and “love,” do not. So the subjects and predicates are not interchangeable.
These verses cannot mean that “Spirit is God” or “love is God.”
>John 14:7
Because Jesus perfectly reflected the personality of his Father, seeing Jesus was like seeing God himself. (Mt 11:27) The disciples had “seen the Father” by perceiving God’s personality, will, and purpose through what Jesus said and did.
>1 John 5:20
It is obvious that grammatically the word “this” (outos) could be referring to either the Father or Jesus in this particular scripture (see the footnote for 1 John 5:20 in the very trinitarian NIV Study Bible and the comments on 1 Jn 5:20 by the staunchly trinitarian scholar A. T. Robertson in his Word Pictures, Vol. VI, p. 245.).
But the fact that the true God (or “the true One”) has just been identified as the Father of Jesus (1 Jn 5:20, TEV and GNB) makes it highly probable that “this is the true God” refers to the Father, not Jesus.
The noted trinitarian NT scholar Murray J. Harris sums up his 13-page analysis of this scripture as follows:
“Although it is certainly possible that outos refers back to Jesus Christ, several converging lines of evidence point to ‘the true one,’ God the Father, as the probable antecedent. This position, outos = God [Father], is held by many commentators, authors of general studies, and significantly, by those grammarians who express an opinion on the matter.” - p. 253, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992.
Notice how this trinitarian scholar actually admits that the probability is that the Father (not Jesus) is being called the true God here. He even tells us (and cites examples in his footnotes) that New Testament grammarians and commentators (most of them trinitarian, of course) agree !!!
So the immediate context makes it probable that the true God is the Father in this scripture also. If we include the context of all the uses of the ‘true God’ in the NT, it is certain that He is the Father (whose personal name is Jehovah - Jer. 10:10, ASV; Ps. 83:18, KJV; Ex. 3:15, NEB). A quick glance at 1 Thess. 1:9 and 10, for example makes it very clear that “the true God” is the Father.
>John 5:17-18
Jesus’ opposers are the ones who accused him of making himself equal to God. (John 5:18; 10:30-33)
However, Jesus NEVER claimed to be on the same level as Almighty God. He said: “The Father is greater than I am.”—John 14:28.
“My Father is greater than I [Jesus].”—John 14:28.
“I [Jesus] ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God.”—John 20:17.
“To us there is but one God, the Father.”—1 Corinthians 8:6.
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”—1 Peter 1:3.
“These things saith the Amen [Jesus], . . . the beginning of the creation of God.”—Revelation 3:14.
Can I still go to heaven if I frick trannies and skinning mice?
The most obvious example is Thomas meeting risen Christ and calling Him Ho Theos (aha God with the article as in the most High Father, Yahweh).
Before that John calls Jesus merely theos which is generic for a god or a divine being.
John being a theological document, closest to gnosticism in form and style (not the substance, there's only a incipient literary device duality but not an ontological one) and full of symbolism have this weight more than anything, really.
>Thomas answered and said to him, “My LORD and my GOD."
>"I and the Father are one."
That this did not mean that Jesus claimed to be the Father or to be God is evident from his reply !
The oneness to which Jesus referred must be understood in harmony with the context of his statement.
He was speaking of his works and his care of the “sheep” who would follow him. His works, as well as his words, demonstrated that there was unity, not disunity and disharmony, between him and his Father, a point his reply went on to emphasize. (John 10:25, 26, 37, 38; John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 8:16-18.)
As regards his “sheep,” he and his Father were likewise at unity in their protecting such sheeplike ones and leading them to everlasting life. (John 10:27-29; Ezekiel 34:23, 24.)
Jesus’ prayer on behalf of the unity of all his disciples, including future ones, shows that the oneness, or union, between Jesus and his Father was not as to identity of person but as to PURPOSE and ACTION !
In this way Jesus’ disciples could “ALL BE ONE,” just as he and his Father ARE ONE.—John 17:20-23.
>>"Before Abraham was, I AM."
This was not a reference to God's proclamation in Genesis, Jesus was here referring to an existence from before Abraham and continuing down till he spoke
Christ was not referring to oneness in love, otherwise the israelites would not have immediately tried to stone Him (both times after He confessed His divinity!).
That’s 6 people
Technically it should just be Eve since she always hated god (like all women!) and Adam was deceived.
Adam was dumb enough to go through with it, though. He was the equivalent of a nu-male who simps for prostitutes on onlyfans.
Touch grass
>touch grass
Is this phrase a /misc/ pysiop?
Eve is just a human shaped Fleshlight constructed from Adam's rib.
Adam and his rib count as one person.
kind of based
Putin's a merchant?
Based Diocletian
That Putin ebil deed is very telling.
but hitler was right though and based
Post dicky and ruin the Cinemaphile immigrant's religious lecture
>requesting for cp
See you later alligator
dicky isn't cp, redditor
Stay mad ho
dicky ≠ cp
Best I can do is some Millie Bobbie's Brown Booty
THATS A CHILD WTF
Alternative view
PUTIN IS israeli?!?!?!
>Pocahontas
Leave it to a woman to cause the genocide of her own people.
>invented photography
No, some sand Black person who nobody has ever heard of did not invent photography
read a book, chud
.
This isn’t me giving an opinion on the order of this list but how did they come up with and justify it?
>Muhammad
Stopped reading
>direct line to JWs
Uhhh... based?!?
Yes (◕‿◕)
Turn back to the one true Catholic Church before it’s too late. Repent.
lol
It makes no sense to act as if you are the restorers of Israel's ancient faith when Israel itself obtained its land through aggressive warfare (albeit which was sanctioned by God) and sanctioned execution by fire in its penal code.
The nations whom Israel defeated were thoroughly corrupted by violence and depraved practices—including bestiality, incest, and child sacrifice.
After giving them centuries to change their ways, God said: “It is by all these things that the nations that I am driving out from before you have made themselves unclean.”—Leviticus 18:21-25; Jeremiah 7:31.
Christians are NOT authorized to fight against their enemies.
Instead of sending his followers to war, Jesus told them: “Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you, so that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens.” (Matthew 5:44, 45)
If God wants his worshippers in all nations to love their enemies and to remain separate from the world, how could he support either side of a violent conflict today ???
>Israel itself obtained its land through aggressive warfare (albeit which was sanctioned by God)
I had relatives in the Palestine campaign of 1917-18, I don't think any of them thought they were sanctioned by God.
I mean ancient Israel, not the modern state
Ancient Christians have already grappled with such issues. See Augustine's just war theory. The same ethical intuition which allows us to act to defend the innocent allows states to act to maintain the peace against grievous injustice. I'm just arguing that execution by fire isn't entirely contrary to the Spirit of the Gospel, because one and the same Spirit inspired the Old Testament.
Leviticus 21:9 applies to Israelites, not canaanites. The modern Catholic Church teaches that modern conditions are such that states should no longer have the right to execute people. But such executions are not intrinsically evil.
why do you like cathars so much?
> Lies about being founded by Jesus based on a pun that doesn't even make sense.
> Was actually founded in 1475 after getting kicked out of the Orthodox church for telling people they had to worship the Pope as being same or similar to God.
ISHYGDDT
It's such a cute art style... I will say a prayer for her conversion
This chart is nonsense.
Proto-Indo-European religion didn’t derive from Near Eastern paganism and Yahwism/Judaism is a direct descendant of Egyptian religion, which came out of Near Eastern Paganism.
False
“Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.”—Deuteronomy 6:4.
“You, whose name is Jehovah, you ALONE are the Most High over all the earth.”—Psalm 83:18.
“God is only one.”—Galatians 3:20.
Typical Pr*t propaganda. We aren’t taught that the pope is infallible. He’s only human
Magisterium dude.
catholics literally believe it is impossible for the pope to make error on doctrine
That's not quite true. Catholics believe in Mathew 16, where Christ instructs St Peter to found the Church in His name.
>17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[b] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[d] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[e] loosed in heaven.” 20 Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.
That authority given to St Peter directly by Christ himself has been handed down through successive Popes is the basis of what's called Magisterium which is the authority of the Pope and the Pope alone to speak for God.
>St Peter directly by Christ himself has been handed down through successive Popes
it clearly hasn't. the church of Vatican II is the same church that Christ founded? give me a break
So how come the Catholics we're kicked out of the Orthodox church? It's not like Peter founded the Catholic church and then passed his Pharisee hat down to a new person every so often until you get the current Pope. You guys didn't even exist until almost 2000 years after the crucifixion
Christ founded the Catholic Church and gave the keys to Peter, and the current Pope is the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
The Orthodox have valid bishops, saints, theology, and holiness, but they are in a state of schism.
we should we see how did Peter himself understand Jesus’ words
Growing up an Israelite, Peter would have been familiar with various Hebrew prophecies speaking of a “stone” or a “cornerstone.” (Isaiah 8:13, 14; 28:16; Zechariah 3:9)
When he quoted one of them in a letter to his fellow believers, Peter explained that the prophesied “cornerstone” was the Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah. Peter used the Greek term pe’tra (the same word found in Jesus’ statement at Matthew 16:18) for CHRIST ALONE.—1 Peter 2:4-8.
Thomas obviously addressed Jesus as “my God” in the sense of Jesus’ being “a god” though not the Almighty God, not “the only true God,” to whom Thomas had often heard Jesus pray. (John 17:1-3)
Or he may have addressed Jesus as “my God” in a way similar to expressions made by his forefathers, recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures, with which Thomas was familiar
On various occasions when individuals were visited or addressed by an angelic messenger of Jehovah, the individuals, or at times the Bible writer setting out the account, responded to or spoke of that angelic messenger as though he were Jehovah God. (Compare Genesis 16:7-11, 13; 18:1-5, 22-33; 32:24-30; Judges 6:11-15; 13:20-22.)
This was because the angelic messenger was acting for Jehovah as his REPRESENTATIVE, speaking in his name, perhaps using the first person singular pronoun, and even saying, “I am the true God.” (Ge 31:11-13; Jg 2:1-5)
Thomas may therefore have spoken to Jesus as “my God” in this sense, acknowledging or confessing Jesus as the representative and spokesman of the true God.
Whatever the case, it is certain that Thomas’ words do not contradict the clear statement he himself had heard Jesus make, namely, “The Father is greater than I am.”—John 14:28
Take your meds heretic.
didn't Eastern Orthodox and Catholics schism? Pretty sure the Catholics were the OG, maybe or maybe not theologically, but geographically Rome was the capital of Christianity before the schism.
Maxwell heavily underrated
Ahem.
he's dead and he died for frick all
Jesus is alive and is KING in heaven since 1914
https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/ebtv/kingdom-began-ruling-1914/
whoa, Jehova's Witnesses believe this?
neat, the new Super Mario Bros is out
Absolutely abhorrent post
>implying I pay for software either
I could live without a single movie ever produced again but not without internet and updated relevant software.
But jokes on you, 99% of the software I use is open source and made for free by neets and autisitc anime fans.
How is it any different?
leechers
>I don't have that many friends
>more like paid
>.. .. paid
> this guy paid nothin to see here
She's sharing it with her friends for one night, not giving a copy of it to everyone in the world.
The girl with the short hair who paid is a baddie.
That doesn't work. You'll get extremely subpar applies on a shitty stunted tree, if any grow at all.
It's like eating your apples at 144p.
labor is the source of all value. by growing the tree, you are expending labor to produce value independent of the original apples. there's no labor involved in piracy, its simply theft.
it's not theft because you're not stealing something.
you're just copying it.
>labor is the source of all value
Tell that to Amazon
>more and more people pirate
>the revenue of the movie goes up because more and more people know about it
wtf?
If they're Monsanto genetically modified seeds, it's considered theft under the law. But that's bullshit and the law there is not moral, so whatever.
Piracy harms artists
and that's a good thing
I hope the whole industry goes under
Funfact, the law considers it theft if you grow apples that are patented/trademarked by Monsanto, and it's how they bankrupt small farmers. They """accidentally""" have some of their genetically modified seeds fly into a competing farm, then they sue the poor saps for all they're worth.
YOU WOULDN'T PIRATE A POTATO
We're the Veggie Tales based?
As a holder of Monstanto/Bayer stock I agree with this.
This is why GMOs are fricking evil and I won't support them. You don't get to copyright God's creation.
As someone who pirates everything, the 'it's not stealing it's replicating' arguments are disingenuous. Just admit you want movies, music, etc, without paying for it. Who's going to stop you?
Yes, but Ive also made sure to buy everything I actually enjoyed. If the vidya or movie is good, I will support it. Except tv shows. TV shows shouldnt cost several hundred dollars for a box set frick outta here.
I pirate because I don't give a frick if the entire industry goes under and part of me actually hopes it does. If I can enjoy the rare movie or TV show here and there while actively contributing to the collapse of the industry so much the better.
Anyone here like to scam commission artists?
>Should pirating movies be illegal ?
It's only theft to those who view preservation as worthless
It should be illegal to appropriate culture from a marginalized group and make a profit from them without proper recognition and compensation.
Please show us your face we know you are a woman
What kid dosent grow up to pirate after seeing this banger at the beggining of every movie?
>JWgay thread
You cant buy apples you can subscribe to the apples
>Should pirating movies be illegal ?
Yeah, I don't want to be some pussy ass law abiding citizen.
>buy apple
>doesn't buy the water
YES, IT'S THEFT, YOU FRICKING BRAINLET
>is it theft
yes.
>does that matter
no
Steal if you want but dont delude yourself. I have pirated 50 movies this month.
No lol. Why should taxpayers in foreign countries pay to enforce hollywood's profit by punishing their own.
copyright is corporate chicanery
It shouldn't be illegal but I don't see how it compares to that picture.
Go back to Cinemaphile or Cinemaphile ya smelly french b***h
He is not a woman.
ferme ta gueule, con de jw baiter
actual religion brainlet here, is Jesus God or just his son, and wtf is the holy spirit anyway
God the Father (whose name is Jehovah) is the only true God.
Jesus Christ is his firstborn son, is inferior to God, and was created by God.
The Holy Spirit is not a person; it is God's active force.
God is a single being
Jehovah is alone, and above all other beings
Jehovah created everything that exists
Jehovah has a son called Jesus Christ
Jesus is not God
Jesus is not equal to God
Jesus was God's first creation
Jehovah then created everything else through Jesus Christ
Debunked
https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/wp20151101/war-and-early-christianity/
God is one in being, the persons of the trinity are not distinct beings but relations within God.
The analogy I have heard is that the road from Athens to Thebes is the same as the road from Thebes to Athens, yet different things may be predicated (truthfully ascribed to) each road. That is, one road is uphill, and one road is downhill, although they are both the same road. This is how the Trinity works.
For one thing, the Bible does not mention the word “Trinity.” For another, Jesus never claimed to be equal to God. Instead, Jesus worshipped God. (Luke 22:41-44)
You're not supposed to talk about the Holy spirit. Hell you're not even supposed to acknowledge it.
Really only catholics do but they're the synagogue of satan and going to he'll anyway.
Foul pedophiles who worship the prostitute of Babylon!!
He is both part of God and his son. The Holy Trinity, that which is God, is composed of Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. They are different, but they are all part of God.
If you want to wrap your head around it, imagine a man with three heads, each head being independant, but still part of that person.
Ignore the homosexual denouncing the Holy Trinity, it's such a heretical view that neither Orthodox nor Catolics dare entertain. It's more in line with the thinking of 'sorcerers', those searching for magic à la Aleister Crowley.
The trinity is a HERESY and POLYTHEISM
“The Christian Bible, including the New Testament, has no trinitarian statements or speculations concerning a trinitary deity.”—Encyclopædia Britannica.
“The doctrine of the trinity . . . is not a product of the earliest Christian period, and we do not find it carefully expressed before the end of the second century.”—Library of Early Christianity—Gods and the One God.
“In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the [Catholic] Church had to develop her own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin.”—Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Frick off heretic, go preach your gnostic bullshit somewhere else.
>thinking about grandmother who died a long time ago
>pick up her favorite book to help remind you of her/feel more connected to her
>NOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T WORSHIP A BOOK, THAT'S HERESY!!!! IDOLITARY!!!!!!
>LOVING BLACK PEOPLE IS THE ONLY TRUE WAY TO HEAVEN
Wait, you guys don't even like prayer to Christ crucified? How can you call yourselves Christians? That's the essence of reality right there.
Jesus himself directed attention and worship only to JEHOVAH GOD !!
For example, when prodded to do an act of worship to the Devil, Jesus said:
“It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matthew 4:10)
Later Jesus instructed his disciples:
“Do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One.”—Matthew 23:9.
To a Samaritan woman, Jesus described the type of worship that individuals must give to God.
Their worship must be based on spirit and truth. Indeed “the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him.” (John 4:23, 24)
Yes, reverent adoration should be expressed ONLY to GOD.
To render worship to anyone or anything else would be a form of IDOLATRY, which is condemned in both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures.—Exodus 20:4, 5; Galatians 5:19, 20
>Israel's king, Jesus
Jesus was not the king of Israel, he said he was the King of Heaven, which he said does not exist in this world. this is israeli propaganda for neocons who support israel
the trinity is one God in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Each person is fully God, but each person is not the other person. Jesus Christ is unique in the persons of the trinity as He is both fully God (the Son) and fully man. He has a full human nature and full divine nature.
Apples don't grow true to seed. This is how you get crabapples.
They don't understand that there are a lot of movies people would just never watch it they couldn't watch it for free. It's not even just a price issue (though that's a big part of it.) sorry me movies just don't seem worth the risk.
>The Holy Spirit is not a person; it is God's active force
can you elaborate on this a little? seems a very redundant concept
The holy spirit is God’s power in action, his active force. (Micah 3:8; Luke 1:35)
God sends out his spirit by projecting his energy to any place to accomplish his will.—Psalm 104:30; 139:7.
The third person of the Holy Trinity is the Holy Spirit.
Christ Himself testifies that He is a person:
>when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
i still dont understand who (what?) exactly is the holy spirit
i mean, the father-son part is quite straightforward, but how is the holy spirit different than the father, and if it's just "God's active force" then is it not a person but just God's power? what makes him deserve to be part of the trinity and not just be included with the father?
Each has its own hypostasis that differ in their eternal mode of being but they share the same Divinity fully.
As Omniscience, omnipresence belongs to the Father as part of his substance so those belong to the Spirit and you can say He's everywhere and all that.
I wish he used a tripcode. I admit I would filter it but it's obvious that he schizo posts regardless.
The trinity is ultimately so far above us that it is impossible to fully comprehend. But that said, we can have some knowledge of it.
St. Augustine used a metaphor of the human soul to attempt to describe the trinity. In this metaphor, the self is the Father, the self-image is Christ, and the Holy Spirit is the natural love which the self has for itself (or at least its own conception of itself).
To a modern mind, this may seem rather narcissistic. But Augustine's analogy, however brilliant is of course ultimately imperfect, because these things in our own soul are not distinct persons.
The Spirit is not an impersonal power, although He is sometimes described or conceptualized that way. The typical imagery in the Bible is less personal—a breath, a dove, a living fire.
I have heard people say that the love between the Father and the Son is so strong, that the love itself is a person, the Holy Spirit.
The Catechism describes Him more here:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c3a8.htm
yes if it's a patented apple
>no "SAD" in the tweet
frick you cheetoman
it aint easy bein cheesy
Meta thread got deleted. Nice one, jannies
>anon made thread b***hing bout this thread and board
>this thread is still up
You know what, jannies are kind of based
Hey thanks death. Can you pen me in sometime soon though? I'd really like some peace.
You can't stop me.
That is the most moronic pic that has ever existed in all of history.
what is JWanon doing here LMAO
You are him trying yo establish an identity here on Cinemaphile
Who's mad?
Television and film?
This is a janitor approved off topic thread
He is not a woman and you should stop pretending he is
They're actually in the process of making pic illegal by copyrighting seeds btw.
Reminder that JWanon is a French girl, just ask her to show her breasts and don't engage in her propaganda
samegay
Meds
That kind of thing works with the midwits on Cinemaphile but not for high IQ fa/tv/irgins. have a nice day.
Did you get permabanned from Cinemaphile and Cinemaphile for you to spam Cinemaphile and Cinemaphile now you Black person
>thread about movie piracy
>it's actually a bunch of schizos talking about mythology
Frick this board